Spyke
lemmy.zip

Not saying this info is wrong but the fins on the bombs in those pictures look very different. I'm no bomb expert of course

16
SillyDudereply
lemmy.zip

That's pretty much undeniably a mk82 warhead. Which are fitted with different tail sections and other guidance systems for whatever they want to be used for. If the report is correct in that it was a 200lb load with 300lbs of metal, that would be the mk82 mod 7. Which likely has a Israeli tail section made for low altitude deployment with high precision.

68
Warl0k3reply
lemmy.world

Going by the tail section (and lack of wings), it looks like this was a mk82 fitted with a Paveway II system, which would make sense given that this was likely intended to be used to demolish the bridge he's standing on...

::: spoiler Paveway tail/nose for comparison

:::

11
Warl0k3reply
lemmy.world

In my case, autism. UXO/equipment identification is a hobby. If you think that's weird you should see how weird I got when they let me poke around in the Southern Pacific 4294 cab...

8

I don't gotta be an expert to know he's talking about trains XD That's awesome man I'm still trying to learn how to install arch on my own

4
infosec.pub

Lemmy has a crowd of experts and academics in certain fields, but also weird hobbyists that expertise themselves for fun on a certain topic. Sometimes they are the same person.

6

And it wasn't always the case, but people love it when others geek out over their obscure hobby/obsession. A sign of life is much appreciated in the internet world these days.

2

Either way it's clearly different surroundings, and the missile in the video goes into a crater where a previous missile hit, while this still shows a missile hitting flat terrain

Edit: silly me, it's just zoomed in. And the rocket hits a little farther back from the crater, not in the existing crater.

3
lemmy.world

Jfc, Israel just cant help but targeting innocent people, civilians, and the press are their prime targets

124

I don't trust anyone who, after hearing the story of Abraham, still is like "yeah, more of that please!"

24
Jackreply
slrpnk.net

just cant help

This assumes that the bomb accidentally fell there. This was a targeted strike.

0
T00l_shedreply
lemmy.world

Not the way I worded it. I said they cant help but target innocent, civilians and journalists

18
Jackreply
slrpnk.net

Ah I see, I am just unfamiliar with the expression it seems.

10
T00l_shedreply
lemmy.world

No worries! Not sure why you got so many downvotes for a clear misunderstanding

6

As the OP said: “just can’t help but” is a negation of what you quoted.

It’s like saying they “can’t not target [innocents]”

8
lemmy.ml

The only thing Israel loves more than killing journalists, is killing children.

119
lemmy.world

Their leader is a child killer, and the US leader is a child rapist. Talk about a match made in the deepest recesses of Hell.

16
webadictreply
lemmy.world

You're being really unfair. Trump very well could've also killed children.

12
TwilitSkyreply
lemmy.world

Ok, but I think we can all admit child detectives are neither cute nor amusing.

4
lemmy.world

And they would have gotten away with it too! If it weren't for those meddling kids and their mangy dog!

5

IRL version:

Nancy Drew and Hardy Boy were never seen or heard from again.

4
Hadriscusreply
jlai.lu

what a chad. may he continue to evade bombs for a long time

39

Didn't really evade this bomb though, did he? Someone said it struck in the crack there and exploded in there, which was very lucky for them. Otherwise, smithereens.

4
lemmy.ml

For fun, I just looked at headlines for this. Almost all of them mention Lebanon, only two mention Israel or IDF. Classic.

98
feddit.uk

It's ok guys, the missile just happened to safely "land" in the area, by chance, "next to" the guy, who is only a "presenter", not a journalist . There's definitely no war crime to see here.

83
lemmy.ca

History is written by the victors. This realization has made me question every version of history I have ever been taught

23

As moral compasses adjust over time, it has become clear that almost everyone that made it into history books was an asshole. And the ones that weren't might have only been that way because they died too soon or history had gaps.

7

Israel definitely didn't try to kill this journalist or the 300 journalists they successfully killed in the last 2.5 years.

31
slrpnk.net

Ahh the BBC, Pinnacle of using soft language (*passive voice is what I meant here) to describe war crimes

22
IMALlamareply
lemmy.world

Only when Israel is the perpetrator. This is the NYT, but the BBC does the same thing.

9

Yuuuup. Almost like there's a lot of powerful people worldwide that rely on propaganda to not just obfuscate their horrifyingly immoral acts, but create a culture where these acts are permissible when discovered.

Think about how the news used passive voice to never use the word rape or torture to describe what the epstein elite were doing to children, despite it being clearly laid out in front of our eyes.

Same thing happening in Gaza, Lebanon, Sudan, West Papua, and now Iran, in a non exhaustive but exhausting list of countries where the west is funding and arming genocides in the name of "Spreading democracy" (Stealing Natural Resources ) while the news stations softly softly their way around talking points.

2
lemmy.world

Almost the exact same spot as one before and nothing there but him...

52

the old one two attack, its done to target aid workers and whatnot.

44
sh.itjust.works

And the bridge that was still standing.

I doubt he was specifically targeted, since the margin of the miss was too large. But the ones doing the bombing knew he was there and went ahead to bomb the bridge anyway.

2
Krauerkingreply
lemy.lol

Actually Israel is known to use a double tap bombing method that waits until reporters and aid shows up to the original site and then they strike it again to take out additional people to make it harder to respond to the next attack.

Also this was a cluster munition bomb ment to shoot shrapnel out, the goal is to just hit solid ground to make it explode sideways, they just happened to double tap exactly the same spot and there was a cavity under the road.

9
sh.itjust.works

From the stills it looks like a standard mk82 with a guidance kit. It lacks the longetudenal slits that cluster munition bodies have. Also cluster munitions deploy their bomblets about 50-150m before they hit the ground, otherwise they don't get distribution.

It looks more like they dropped a followup bomb on a bridge that was not destroyed by the first bomb. Its a common practice for low urgency targets.

Especially considering it hit the same crater. Those bombs are accurate to about 1m, so that is not unusualy to hit almost the same spot.

I still think they just did not care he was there. If they were targeting him, it would have hit him.

6

True I don't think they were targeting him specifically but they were targeting the professions of who shows up after the first hit. They seemingly want a couple professions caught in the crossfire. And its ones that is a crime to target.

Also that is still incredibly lazy with expensive munitions to not calculate the strike to actually hit again a weak point but to just send it on the same trajectory and hope it blows up enough to get the job done.

3
lemmy.world

No kidding.

The Gaza war has become the deadliest conflict for journalists in history, with reports indicating that Israeli actions killed over 180 to more than 270 journalists, mostly Palestinians, between October 2023 and August 2025.

22

Israel is openly targeting journalists. The IDF have shot anyone with MEDIA on their body. they have been since the Oct 7 attacks. Israel does not want their genocide or war crimes exposed, so they actively (and encourage) soldiers to target media.

And now the USA has sided with this regime to kill more civilians in Iran.

17
thelemmy.club

This video is ANTI SEMETIC!

-The ADL, AIPAC, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, EVERY Republican!

33
mander.xyz

Any world leader and politician not calling out israel government is evil and lying to people.

30

Life under capitalism, where 95% of your leaders are trying to think of better ways to exploit you.

11
lemmy.dbzer0.com

So, will Keir Starmer comment on this or is his mouth too busy wrapped around Netanyahu's dick?!

19
lemmy.world

They have been attacking Lebanon every day since the "ceasefire" with Hezbollah.

If you want something even crazier, Israel just bombed Syria who is not even involved in any of this and even helps Israel.

22
Blackmistreply
feddit.uk

The Middle East is now just Israel and temporarily embarrassed Israel.

9

The Middle East is now just Israel and temporarily embarrassed Israel.

And a lot of very confused and out of place American military.

4
lemmy.world

That was (ostensibly) in response to Syrian leadership going after the Druz, whom Israel needs to keep Syrian Muslims in check.

3

They've been playing this sectarian card for decades now. They only care about dividing Syria and weakening it regardless of who's in charge.

3
Garbagioreply
lemmy.zip

With all eyes on Iran, Israel decided it was enough cover to try and conquer Lebanon again.

5

Hezbollah insurgents have started trying to retake parts of their country, with Israel focused on Iran.

The Israeli response has been to kill a bunch of civilians in retaliation.

4
lemmy.world

Does it maybe seem like the pilot intentionally missed, though--disobeying orders? Isn't this like missing an ant?

5

it supposedly was shrapnel munition, so you want to hit closeby but not necessarily on the target. But the bomb went through the hole and exploded in the canal under the street which is what saved his life. I see no reason to give an IOF stormtrooper the benefit of the doubt. They wanted to kill him, but accidentaly bungled it simple as.

25
feddit.uk

It's in the exact same spot as a previous strike. It's called a "double tap" attack, and it's a war crime.
The guy only survived because the bomb went off inside the crater from a previous strike, he would've been turned into powder if that had exploded in the surface.

23
feddit.uk

To a degree it is, but target selection is (or should be - there are reports of the IDF using AI to designate targets, which is a whole nother omnishambles) done by human hand. If there is a group of people inside the lethality radius of your bomb, then you are designating them as targets.
Not sure I understood exactly what you're asking?

1

I think it was a paveway according to other comments here. Big and heavy, not accurate to the meter, not modern. Targeting is less important than the weapons technology. Incredibly advanced targeting algorithms still won't steer a big dumb jobbie from the 1970s any faster under changing wind conditions, for example.

1
ladreply
programming.dev

If you mean missing an ant with a gun, then maybe. But it doesn't look deliberate, and the explosion could have killed them anyway

4
lemmy.today

They can target specific buildings in a group. They put that bomb exactly where they wanted to. He was targeted.

5
ladreply
programming.dev

The one I responded to assumed he was missed on purpose, I don't argue he was not targeted, I argue it's practically impossible to miss him by so little on purpose and not make him die in the explosion at the same time

3

Valid. I also heard that they didn't really target him, they targeted his truck, but still, you target anything near people, and they are at great risk of shrapnel injuries if you don't get entirely blown up, and reportedly this journalist was injured by shrapnel. I don't know how he could have avoided it by anything but sheer luck.

3
lemmy.world

It was either targeted at him, or a double tap strike at the same place to kill medical personell if the first strike hit someone.

10
Zettareply
mander.xyz

I hate Israel as well, but you both appear to be wrong. It looks like they were just finishing taking out a bridge by hitting the last part that was still standing.

Not saying this is good, and I'm not defending Israel, but that's what this strike was.

0
Zettareply
mander.xyz

How in the world can you tell it is a "shrapnel warhead". I'm no weapons expert (you obviously aren't either), but I'm pretty positive most shrapnel warheads detonate well above the ground to pepper the target with shrapnel and have a much wider area of kill. This bomb clearly penetrated the road and exploded just like a high explosive warhead would, which is used to destroy buildings and bridges and whatnot.

6
Zettareply
mander.xyz

I do not see an article linked in this post, but again, if you look at the frame by frame, it's not a shrapnel warhead, and whoever say it is does not know what they are talking about. It is a high explosive warhead that is designed to penetrate the object they are targeting and then explode from within to cause as much damage to the structure as possible. A shrapnel warhead would have little to no effect on a concrete and rebar structure.

4
Zettareply
mander.xyz

You were absolutely wrong. In the two frames, you can see the bomb just as it penetrates the roadway, and then the next frame shows the explosion is obviously happening from underneath
/inside of the bridge from the way the blast looks. You are bullshitting and don't know what you're talking about. And again, I'm no expert, but I clearly know more than you. This was a high explosive warhead not anything designed to create shrapnel as a primary goal. Obligatory fuck genocidal religious nut job Israel but making shit up doesnt help anyone and ruins the credibility of people spreading the lie.

5
jlai.lu

How can you tell? Genuinely interested as I thought the shrapnel was just blasted rubble.

1
Zettareply
mander.xyz

I mean it definitely looks like a low bridge there's railing on either side and the big hole in the center of it looks like a hole in a bridge.

This is very common in the Ukraine-Russian war where both sides launch multiple munitions across a bridge to take it fully down in the center.

You can also see all the rebar sticking up in the first hole, which definitely indicates it is a bridge and not a road. Roads don't have rebar through them. Bridges do.

2

Look at my other comment to prole, it's absolutely not a "shrapnel warhead". A warhead with shrapnel as its main design would detonate well above the ground and pepper the ground with shrapnel and would have little effect on a bridge.

https://mander.xyz/comment/26009976

3
lemmy.world

Why am I not surprised that it is Israel that makes such mistakes?

2
bokherifreply
lemmy.world

Once is a mistake, twice maybe, 738363727th time surely aint a mistake. These fuckers just like killing people for no reason.

6

It's not for no reason. They do it to hide their ethnic cleansing and illegal expansionism.

1
feddit.nu

A terrorist state bombing the mouthpiece of another terrorist state.

Can't say I'm overwhelmed with emotion

-21
murvelreply
feddit.nu

What the fuck are you talking about, answer the question

-20
feddit.uk

You've justified the murder of journalists, whether this one was murdered or not. It was attempted murder, which carries all of the intent of a successful murder. And we're seeing the video precisely because of survivorship bias. The 300 or so other journalists the IDF have murdered in the last 2 years were not so lucky.

Give your head a wobble mate, you're literally out here justifying the murder of press in war zones.

18
x1gmareply
lemmy.world

Give your head a wobble mate, you're literally out here justifying the murder of press in war zones.

They won't get it, the good-vs-bad is so rooted so deeply in their thought process that they don't even realize it. At this point it's just cheering for every death of a "bad guy". It was bad when it started with celebrating the deaths of "terrorists", then collateral damages started to be fine as well, as long as the target died too, and somehow we ended up here, where full on war crimes and genocides against civilians are okay, as long as they are the so-called bad guys or in the way of a mission against them.

It's honestly sickening. They are all human beings, and we all bleed all the same. Just because someone's been born in a Hezbollah-controlled shithole, or is working for an irrelevant Russian TV outlet, they don't deserve to die, and it doesn't make their death acceptable.

2
murvelreply
feddit.nu

So no.

And no, I'm not justifying anything.

I could ask you to point to where you think I justify killing but what a waste of time it would be, asking questions to people so fucking deep in the political delirium.

-11

Your first comment.
You don't care he was bombed because he's "the mouthpiece of a terrorist state".

10
murvelreply
feddit.nu

Is your ego so fragile that you cannot simply answer the question?

-3

That's because they don't know the RT is a russian mouthpiece....that and there are a fuck ton of tankies here who think russia can do no wrong.

1
sh.itjust.works

He's a British man, but he was working for the Russian state-controlled media organization Russia Today. So, I don't think you can really call him a "journalist" anymore.

-34
mirshafiereply
europe.pub

He is still literally a journalist whether you like it or not. FOX News says their content is entertainment, but I wouldn't bring that point up if one of their reporters was violently targeted in their line of work.

39
mercreply
sh.itjust.works

No, he's not a journalist. He's a propagandist working for the Russian government.

-24
mrdownreply
lemmy.world

A propagandist can be a journalist, a teacher, a doctor etc. You don't bomb unarmed people you disgusting peace of trash

26
Hiro8811reply
lemmy.world

I think I've missed the part where he said it's okay to bomb unarmed people, can you point it out?

-5

journalists are protected under international humanitarian law in war zones by saying he is not a journalist he is alluding that that person deserve to die for being a propagandist

18
mercreply
sh.itjust.works

You don't bomb unarmed people you disgusting peace of trash

Because I noted that he's a propagandist, you think I supported his being bombed? That's all you, my friend. I said nothing about that.

-10

You may not realize this, but being a journalist provides him with protections. As a journalist he should not be a target, same as a medic. No matter whose side he is on, he is not a target. By attempting to strip him of this title, you would also be stripping him of his legal protection from military targeting.
Most people agree that journalists (even "enemy" journalists) should not be targeted by weapons, for what should be fairly obvious moral reasons.
I hope you understand now why you are experiencing such a huge level of disagreement here.

4

Propagandist is your opinion. He's a journalist because of the press pass that he's holding, that's why I used the literally signifier.

0

He should have been in an IDF tank with full Israeli censor over the content instead of on the front lines getting bombed by Israel. That is what real "journalism" looks like.

17

Yeah he’s a propagandist. But him getting bombed is still a WTF moment.

12
feddit.uk

If he had been working for the British state-controlled media organization the British Broadcasting Corporation, would you still call him a journalist?

7
mercreply
sh.itjust.works

Yes, because the BBC hasn't been caught repeatedly coordinating with state intelligence services to spread disinformation, setting up astroturf campaigns to spread misinformation, funnelling money to "influencers" to destabilize governments, secretly operating media outlets under other names in other countries, etc.

2
feddit.uk

Ok, so double standards it is, then. You like the BBC, so you ignore all the shady shit they do, but you don't like RT so you highlight their problems, and hold both to different standards.
You need to read about critical thinking. It will make your world a much less confusing place.

0
feddit.uk

Irrelevant. The point is that you believe you get to decide, based on some convenient criteria of your own choosing,which news outlets can call their workers journalists, and which ones will be classed as propagandists and therefore lose the right to safety from military strikes.
Effectively you think you should get the power of life and death over people who are putting their lives at risk to report from war zones.
You are a coward, decreeing all this from behind an anonymous profile on the Internet.

-2
piefed.blahaj.zone

Wild to see 280 people upvoting content from RT, which is literally a Russian propaganda outlet. But thanks for the list of 280 people whose votes I can safely ignore, I guess.

-58
mrdownreply
lemmy.world

What russia propaganda is spread in this specific video? This is also a community about insane videos so they upvote insane videos

50
explodiclereply
sh.itjust.works

It's propaganda because it shows how Israel bombs indiscriminately while they're at war with Russia's ally Iran. This is effective propaganda because it's true.

10
mrdownreply
lemmy.world

The word russia was never mentionned in video. Yes RT do propaganda but it is not in this video

11

The video literally has a watermark on it that says russia in big letters in a twitter handle. You clearly did not watch the video or are lying.

-1
mrdownreply
lemmy.world

I never said he is not a propagandist. I said a propagandist can be a journalist or any other job relating to public affairs

5
Dasusreply
lemmy.world

I think the point he's making (and at least which I was making with the article, and it's actually a really good read) is that quality propaganda is inherently hard to discern by it's very nature, and in this time of war with Russia, we should probably do even the small things we can to avoid known Russian propaganda outlets.

Or do you disagree?

3
mrdownreply
lemmy.world

He is claiming that doing propaganda strip you of the titlte of journalist which would mean that person is not a protected person in war zone. It is like someone getting hit by a car and someone else talking about how the person who was hit was a bully who hurr many people. It is a justification of violence

4
Dasusreply
lemmy.world

No, I don't agree with that. The reporter doesn't have anything to do with it.

It's about not watching known propaganda outlets, because despite their information being accurate most of the time (and convincingly small lies other times), they usually have an agenda as to where they want to take you, feelings-wise.

For example, during WWII, Germans would've never tuned into Atlantikssender if it had been lies. No, it was (mostly) accurate reporting (with wins and losses, Germany always lost a bit more than they actually did, and the Allies always won a bit more than they did). What made it propaganda, aside from the small exaggeration, was Vicky mit drei Küssen, or "Vicky with three kisses", who was an actress of German origin, who had escaped to England, and was there to make the German soldiers just feel like the war is bullshit (which it is, as a larger phenomena as well, so that's not in any way untrue either) and to imagine being home with their better half. Or if they didn't have one, made them imagine having one.

I'm not saying this reporter is any of those things, or in any way involved with Russian propaganda at all. I'm saying RT is, and we can't possibly know which of their material is bending the truth and how. Obviously it isn't this, as shooting journalists is pretty common for Israel, but the larger point is still that we can't know, so just avoiding anything RT is the best way to go.

"Justification for violence" pssshhh, I'd say "good try", but it really was not even a good try

3

But the other user complained about the journalist not the russia media

2
lemmy.world

LOL hang the fuck on. You're saying the explosion we all saw didn't happen?

GTFO here.

23

Did not say that. I said what I said. I said this is from RT which is a known outlet for Russian propaganda. Why are you so intent on sealioning for a known propaganda wing for the Russian government? Actually, never mind, don’t answer, I don’t care. I’m not interested in debating with authoritarians, fascists, and tankies. You all can respectfully go lick grass.

-5

Oh yeah, this video is clearly Russian propaganda.

Are you that much a conspiracy theorist that you lost all pragmatism in life? It doesn't matter where this video comes from, it is what it is.

Sheesh you must be fun at parties

21
kersplompreply
piefed.blahaj.zone

Don’t try to drag me into being trampled by harassers by making McCarthyist claims about what I believe with zero evidence. You are the worst type of person. Blocked.

-1
m532reply

Did you write this from your Fuhrerbunker?

0
0_o7reply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

But thanks for the list of 280 people whose votes I can safely ignore, I guess.

Cool, and we have a list of hasbara accounts like yours.

12
kersplompreply
piefed.blahaj.zone

Wow thanks for the threat man that’s fun to wake up to. I guess I must have really upset the tankie mothership to have gotten so many threats today. I do not support fascists or authoritarians of ANY kind, wild to see that you only dislike them when it’s not daddy russia.

Like seriously, you in particular confuse me. What are you doing on the anarchist instance if you’re going to go out of your way to threaten people for calling out state-controlled media? Such a hypocrite.

0

Wild to see this comment having such downvotes.

I mean, not actually.

But it's nice to see.

9
explodiclereply
sh.itjust.works

WAIT is there a way to block someone's votes from influencing the count your client displays?

9
kersplompreply
piefed.blahaj.zone

Yup, it takes some programming but I find it quite handy for avoiding botnets and tankies.

2

RussiAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGHGHHHGGHGHGHGHGHHGGHHG!!!!!!!!!

6
lemmy.world

RT journalist so it's hard to believe. Or could have been staged. The way they describe the bomb and the "good luck" it didn't kill anyone

-68
lemmy.ml

I only get my news from trusted CIA cutouts owned by billionaire oligarchs

47
lemmy.world

The best today are a short list of YouTube channels. Truly independent investigative journalists are a rare treasure these days.

0
lemmy.wtf

There are many that don't exist exclusively to push the narrative their owners want to get out there, don't be so obtuse.

-11
lemmy.ml

That claim is ridiculous. Name a single media source that does not slavishly serve the political context it arises from

16

And you think all three of those are meaningfully independent from the anglo-american military/espionage cartel?

10
x1gmareply
lemmy.world

Yeah, because it matters which journalist is targeted. The good guys are obviously allowed to target journalists of the bad guys.

You are an absolute fucking retard, just as anyone agreeing with this stupid ass take. He and his team are fucking civilians. They are not legitimate targets.

21
SupraMarioreply
lemmy.world

They're a mouth piece for Russian propaganda, and as much as Israel can go fuck itself, they literally told people they were targeting the bridge and finishing up the road destruction. Even fired warnings shots...this guy is a known propagandists for russia.

-8
x1gmareply
lemmy.world

Oh, my bad, right. Ignoring collateral civilians isn't a war crime, because obviously they've been warned to fuck off. This is an amazing concept for journalism, you just tell any journalist that is uncomfortable for you to get away or they die, and if they don't, you just kill them. Isn't that great?

Civilians are not a legitimate target, without exceptions.

as much as Israel can go fuck itself, they literally told people they were targeting the bridge and finishing up the road destruction"

"Fuck israel, but actually no". If the same clip would've been from the Ukraine with a Russian shell in the background, you would be protesting the fucking ICC already.

You're a bootlicking asshole, excusing war crimes with pathetic double standards. Fuck you, and everyone coming up with that unhinged argument of "It's not a crime if the good guys done it", "it's not a crime if the victim was a bad guy", or both at the same time. Fuck you, and your moral pseudo hight ground. People like you are part of the reason that the US and their Israeli buddies can invade, genocide and cripple whole countries with close to zero backlash and with zero consequences.

8
SupraMarioreply
lemmy.world

Oh, my bad, right. Ignoring collateral civilians isn't a war crime, because obviously they've been warned to fuck off. This is an amazing concept for journalism, you just tell any journalist that is uncomfortable for you to get away or they die, and if they don't, you just kill them. Isn't that great? Civilians are not a legitimate target, without exceptions.

Are...are you ok? You do know how wars work, legitimate or not ones. You target infrastructure, that's what Israel was doing here. This idiot knows where they were going to be bombing, and set up near it. This isn't journalism.

"Fuck israel, but actually no". If the same clip would've been from the Ukraine with a Russian shell in the background, you would be protesting the fucking ICC already.

It's just Ukraine.

Russia doesn't announce that it's going to bomb a bridge, or location. They just hit civilian apartments.

You're a bootlicking asshole, excusing war crimes with pathetic double standards. Fuck you, and everyone coming up with that unhinged argument of "It's not a crime if the good guys done it", "it's not a crime if the victim was a bad guy", or both at the same time. Fuck you, and your moral pseudo hight ground. People like you are part of the reason that the US and their Israeli buddies can invade, genocide and cripple whole countries with close to zero backlash and with zero consequences.

The actual fuck are you on? Israel needs to be de-armed and basically neutered, but so does Russia and it propaganda machine. Get off your podium kid, nothing I have ever said has been in support for Israel or the US wars.

2
x1gmareply
lemmy.world

Are...are you ok? You do know how wars work, legitimate or not ones. You target infrastructure, that's what Israel was doing here. This idiot knows where they were going to be bombing, and set up near it. This isn't journalism.

Again, fuck you and your arrogance. You know who's mouthpiecing for who, what strikes have been called where and by whom, and seemingly everything else. Obviously, there isn't a chance that Israel could've lied about that and deliberately striking this guy as claimed, since the Israeli government and IDF have proven to not misreport anything and they have never deliberately targeted civilians, journalists, medical personnel, or other persons of interests. Even the OHCHR stated concerns about the excessive bombings on infrastructure in Lebanon and the impact on civilians, potentially considering those as a war crime. Israeli officials threatened to do the same razing to Lebanon as they did in Gaza, and already started to do the same mass displacement orders (also a war crime btw), but they are just warning them to fuck off before they bomb the shit out of them, so that's all fine, right?

And what is journalism then? Broadcasting from a luxury hotel far away claiming all is well? Those people risk their life to show what's actually happening, and that's exactly why they are protected.

So yeah, I seem to be more okay than you, at least I'm not excusing war crimes and accepting civilian casualties.

Get off your podium kid, nothing I have ever said has been in support for Israel or the US wars.

And yet you're excusing obvious fucking war crimes. Keep lying to yourself and get back to that delicious boot.

0
SupraMarioreply
lemmy.world

Again, fuck you and your arrogance. You know who's mouthpiecing for who, what strikes have been called where and by whom, and seemingly everything else.

The fuck are you on about? It sounds like you're just shouting at the wind. Lol you must not be able to read, or research shit.

Obviously, there isn't a chance that Israel could've lied about that and deliberately striking this guy as claimed, since the Israeli government and IDF have proven to not misreport anything and they have never deliberately targeted civilians, journalists, medical personnel, or other persons of interests.

Dude is literally standing in an existing warning shot crater with the bridge in the background....use your eyes for once, and not your mouth. You seem to be real good at trying to make up silly arguments...

Even the OHCHR stated concerns about the excessive bombings on infrastructure in Lebanon and the impact on civilians, potentially considering those as a war crime. Israeli officials threatened to do the same razing to Lebanon as they did in Gaza, and already started to do the same mass displacement orders (also a war crime btw), but they are just warning them to fuck off before they bomb the shit out of them, so that's all fine, right?

At what point did I say it was ok? Please please show me where I stated what Israel is doing is ok?

And what is journalism then? Broadcasting from a luxury hotel far away claiming all is well? Those people risk their life to show what's actually happening, and that's exactly why they are protected.

Knowing that an area is going to be bombed before hand to get views is not journalism....and it's quite hilarious that you're simping for RT.... assuming you got a little tankie in you.

So yeah, I seem to be more okay than you, at least I'm not excusing war crimes and accepting civilian casualties.

Yea cause that's what I was doing lol, you must have slept through school to be that bad at reading comprehension.

And yet you're excusing obvious fucking war crimes. Keep lying to yourself and get back to that delicious boot.

Lol as I said kid, please show me where I have excused what Israel is doing lol

1

At what point did I say it was ok? Please please show me where I stated what Israel is doing is ok?

Your initial post was "they fired warning shots, he still went there it's his fault", I called you out on that. You doubled down with:

Are...are you ok? You do know how wars work, legitimate or not ones. You target infrastructure, that's what Israel was doing here. This idiot knows where they were going to be bombing, and set up near it. This isn't journalism.

You are literally dismissing any argument with "They targeted infrastructure, which is fine, and the journalist is at fault for being there"

and it's quite hilarious that you're simping for RT.... assuming you got a little tankie in you.

Let's go, you also need to call me a snowflake for your retard bingo card. Should've thought you're a fucking American. Saying a journalist is a human being and has his human rights is simping for RT and being a tankie. You have lost any respect and value of a human life, like most of the US unfortunately.

I'm fucking done wasting time with this bipolar shit. You're doubling and tripling down into points claiming that you're not making those points, and you're not interested in anything else than making your own point anyways, so whatever lol

1
mlgreply
lemmy.world

How in the actual hell do you stage a mk82 slamming into the ground?

What did RT roll up to the Russian AirForce and ask them to fly all the way to Lebanon to drop the equivalent payload behind a staged reporter and hope he survives?

9

That's a bit of a dumb question, although I seriously doubt this was fabricated. Aside from the video effects software we've used for decades to create exactly this sort of footage, just look at the front page of reddit to see the effect that broad access to AI video editing tools has caused. Footage is easier than it has ever been to fake these days, and as a result we have to rely on the credibility of the source. RT has zero credibility in general, but in this case they don't have a history of outright fabricating footage (just lying about the source, content, location, etc.) so I doubt this is fake.

However, it does throw into question his claims that they were never warned or that he was directly targeted - that strike makes plenty of sense and is directly on target if they're trying to demolish that bridge, and very little sense if they were using a laser guided munition to kill him. That landed wayyy out of the CEP for a Paveway II, so either the pilot missed intentionally or... they're trying to extend the initial damage to disable the bridge.

-4